good points but I must note: my Win PC cost the whopping $640 has been in service for 5 years and performs fine for what I need. XML enabaled database publication spreadsheet analysis massive marketing list work (larger spreadsheet and txt file manipulation, last single file was 75 megs) remote operation and of course all the bells and whistles ( DVD publication/replication, graphics, etc)
Fact is HW is not the cost. Unless you are a pirate, or minimally use a computer, SW is the cost. Fact is, I am not aware of corp level SW that is available for MAC. Most corp SW requires a corp level db to function. Still haven't seen that (same thing I informed my previous CEO of 12+ years ago when looking at a platform change and nothing has changed). Mark A Patton [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Mats Bengtsson Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 7:22 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Conversion factors I think you haven't been checking the mac market for a while. I don't think you can find many accessories that don't work on a mac. It's almost always so that it's easier to get something to work on a Mac than on a Win system. Bluetooth is one of them. It took me about 5 min to get my SE T68i to talk to my Powerbook, so that I could use adressbook on the computer to make calls. My friend tried to connect his phone to his PC. After 2 hours he gave up, he was missing a couple of drivers. I agree that a Mac are a bit more expensive that a PC, but it has longer lifespann and the cost for support are a lot less, i.e if a company buys Mac it's a bigger investment but in the long run it evens out pretty nice. It's a bit of topic but still. Now any day our courses around here open, I hope!!! Mats B Karlstad 2004-04-13 kl. 09.02 skrev Greg Vincent: > Sure Mac is nice....if you like paying double for software and triple > for > accessories...and if you like throwing out perfectly good monitors with > obsolete computers, and if you like supporting proprietary monopolizing > corporate greed, ala Microsoft...Apple never could find a way to open > its > code and maintain it's 6% market share...LOSERS > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mats Bengtsson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2004 2:44 AM > Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Conversion factors > > >> There has been a lot of developments in Mac since you gave up on them, >> specially OS X, now in it's 3rd version. It is built on Unix and are a >> LOT more stabile than any Win version you could think about. >> When it comes to apps, I think you could find just about anything you >> will ever need. >> >> just my 2 ct >> >> Mats B >> Karlstad >> Sweden >> >> >> 2004-04-13 kl. 02.44 skrev Mark A Patton: >> >>> Sorry to come into this thread late (and I haven't seen what other >>> posts >>> there may have been) >>> >>> RK, Your on XP (hopefully Pro) and having issues? >>> Dave T, you're on 98? >>> Linux? >>> >>> For what it's worth: >>> I'm no computer pro. I'm a lazy man that figured I could make a >>> computer >>> work for me. >>> Started with OS/400 and at home once the PC launched used MS. 3.X was >>> OK. 95 >>> was a disaster, with 98 being only a minalization of that (har to >>> rebuild 98 >>> every 2 months). W2K was better, but much like driving a Semi >>> through a >>> tropical paradise (getting the job done but inflicting casualties >>> long >>> the >>> way, and not a good experience). >>> >>> Back when I was on 98, I tried many distros of Linux. Great for >>> someone who >>> knows puters and OSs, elsewise no go. >>> Later w/ W2K I tried again and found the same thing for the most part >>> except >>> Linux was more intuitive (ie like MAC & windows). Linux could catch >>> ground, >>> and would work well for me, but the apps I use aren't available (the >>> same >>> reason I gave up on MAC years ago. Doesn't matter how well it works >>> if >>> it >>> doesn;t do what I need it to.) >>> >>> Made the change to XP Pro, and as much as I hate to say it, it has >>> been >>> Wonderful! >>> No system issues, no my not understanding what I need to do minor >>> points, >>> etc, NO NOTHING. The damn thing just WORKS (within reason of any OS >>> under >>> constant attack)! It has just plain WORKED since day one with more >>> robustness than W2K or Linux ever though about, and with more >>> intuitiveness >>> than 3.X, 95 or 98. For the record, I really don;t like it's >>> interface, so >>> it was simply reconfigured to look like W2K (which felt like a semi >>> without >>> a clutch). >>> >>> I guess its just me as adoption rate is low, but as much as I would >>> like to >>> deride it, I really like XP Pro. >>> Word to the wise: any MS product that hints to Home, Education, etc >>> is >>> crap. >>> Pro is the way to go (I guess that is MS terminology for "it works", >>> >>> >>> Mark A Patton >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Corey Bailey >>> Sent: Monday, April 12, 2004 3:41 AM >>> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Conversion factors >>> >>> >>> Hi Dave, >>> If you liked Win NT 3.5, then you will like Win 2K Pro. It's >>> essentially NT >>> 5. I use it as the default OS for the PC machines at home with one >>> box >>> still running Win 98 R2 for those apps that need it as Win 2K does >>> obsolete >>> a number of apps and hdwe that run on 98. >>> >>> At work they just changed out everything for new HP's running XP. I >>> hate it >>> and it does not interface to the Novel network nearly as well as the >>> Win 2k >>> boxes they removed. >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> CB >>> Sorry for continuing the "non-golf" thread. >>> >>> >>> At 10:09 AM 4/11/2004 -0400, you wrote: >>> >>>> My issues are not UNIX skills. I have been a UNIX user since 1976. >>>> I'm a >>>> fairly proficient user of things like "ksh" and "sed". "Vi" used to >>>> be my >>>> editor of choice, but the current mouse-based editors have won me >>>> over >>>> (about 10 years ago). I waited until Windows got to NT3.5 before I >>>> made it >>>> my OS of choice. (I am currently running Win98.) >>>> >>>> Like RK, I dislike depending on Microsoft. And that's on the basis >>>> of >>>> up-close-and-personal; I made a lot of business and technical trips >>>> to >>>> Redmond (and Bellevue, back in 1983 when they were only 350 people), >>>> so I >>>> know them and how they work. And I'd rather opt out -- if I could. >>>> >>>> My problem is that I use a lot of programs and utilities that only >>>> run on >>>> Windows. I haven't tried WINE. If it works well (meaning not much >>>> lost >>>> speed running some of the apps), then it might fill the bill for me. >>>> But I >>>> don't have the time to experiment with it to find out. Guess I care >>>> -- but >>>> not enough to make migration a priority. >>>> >>>> Cheers! >>>> DaveT >>> >>> >>> --- >>> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. >>> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >>> Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 4/9/2004 >>> >>> --- >>> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. >>> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). >>> Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 4/9/2004 >>> >> > --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.657 / Virus Database: 422 - Release Date: 4/13/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.657 / Virus Database: 422 - Release Date: 4/13/2004
